My Thoughts on the Golden Rule in Its Negative and Positive Form

-


Holy Week usually gets devoted to reading from the New Testament. One of the many things taught in the New Testament is the Golden Rule or what is taught as such. Many tend to think that the negative form which says, "Don't do unto others what you don't want others to do unto you." is by Confucius. However, it must be noted that Confucius' moral code is not completely original nor was he the first person to say that rule. It's sometimes attributed to Jewish teachings. Leviticus 19:18 is a clear principle against revenge which the Pharisees had ignored. Revenge was never allowed in the Old Testament either - something that would be such a serious mistake to think about it. The principle of an eye for an eye is not about personal vendettas but not punishing people beyond their offenses. It's like you can get suspended for cheating in an exam but you can't get beheaded for doing so.

The idea that Confucius originally said the golden rule is absurd. Confucius propagated the idea because heathens even discover some degree of moral truth. Matthew 5:46-48 has our Lord Jesus saying that don't the pagans even do civility. Confucius, though a pagan, would've learned the rule one way or another. Confucius propagated the idea of treating others the way you want to be treated. However, he propagated it negatively like many others do. The philosopher Siddharta Gautama of Buddhism also said not to do unto others what's disagreeable to you. Our Lord Jesus was clearly citing the truth when He said that don't the pagans even do civility. The pagans may not be worshiping the one true God but some of them lived good lives, humanly speaking. Their goods works may not save them but it can shame anyone who claims to be a Christian but acts otherwise.

I don't have a problem with saying "If you don't want others to treat you like that then don't treat others like that." It's like if I don't want my properties stolen then I shouldn't steal from others. If parents don't want their children to lie to them then they shouldn't lie to their children. The rule in itself is practical. However, Jesus' way of saying the golden rule is more than just a don't, it's a do. It's not enough to have rules that say "Don't do this, don't do that!" What's also needed in the rules are the "Do this and do that!" Just remember the Ten Commandments is focused mostly on the don't do this and don't do that. The first two commands are saying no other god but God and no grave images. The next two commands say to keep the Sabbath holy and to honor your parents. Then the next six are prohibitions against killing, adultery, stealing, lying, and covetousness. Eight out of ten of the commandments are obviously don't do this and do that!

How does the positive way of saying the golden rule have a bigger impact? You know what not to do but do you know what to do? The golden rule that tells you to treat others the way you want to be treated gives no room for indifference. It's almost like saying "No smoking." vs. "Thank you for not smoking." I observe how often people disobey the rule of not smoking even when the sign is glaring. However, it seems that people are more bound to follow if they're told "Thank you for not smoking." I'm not saying that a no-smoking sign is defective. However, Our Lord Jesus commands to treat others the way you want to be treated calls for bigger action. It's more than just obeying a sign not to litter or to smoke. It's already doing a command to not do either because you're told "Do keep the place clean." It's pretty much like saying, "Please dispose of your garbage properly." may sound more appealing than "Don't throw your garbage anywhere." Saying don't seek revenge isn't enough. Not seeking revenge can give room to passiveness. Instead, don't seek revenge is further accompanied by loving your enemies, forgiving them who wrong you (that's forgiveness at a personal level), and doing good to them that treat you badly. Doing good to people that treat you badly pretty much obeys the golden rule. That pretty much fills the void of what not to do with what to do. 

The golden rule said positively will make you realize how often you keep breaking that rule. Can you really follow it perfectly? The golden rule said positively will make you realize how you are so cut short. It makes you realize even more that if you can't even keep the negative completely then how much more the positive? This would really make philosophical systems like Buddhism and Confucianism fall even shorter. All Buddhism and Confucianism could do are to teach the right living. I don't have a problem with following the Buddhist eightfold path or Confucius' analects on respect for authority as a lifestyle. Christians can be seen practicing the eightfold path of Buddha or Confucius' ethics without believing that such lifestyles lead to salvation. Buddha's advice to have right thinking, right intention, right speech, right action, right profession, right effort, and right concentration are not wrong or contradictory to Christian ethics. Christians are called to such behavior to live right. However, I can't accept Buddhism because it teaches eastern mysticism which is contrary to the Word of God. Buddhism, like Hinduism, focuses on one's individual effort towards salvation. Pagan religions teach that even their gods are capable of error. The motive of doing right in Christianity is also different. Pagan religions teach good works for salvation. Christianity makes genuine good works the inevitable result of salvation. If the pagan gods aren't perfect then the concept of grace is not available. Even the best pagan is still cut short because God is perfect, unlike their non-existent gods who can err.

This also pretty much tells the difference between law and grace. The Law will usually bind you to mostly prohibitions. The Law can only prohibit you like traffic signs, no littering signs, and no smoking signs. These are good but grace makes it better. The difference between paganism and Christianity with the golden rule is drawn by the source. Paganism teaches salvation by human effort. Paganism tends to focus more on humanistic rewards such as having a safe and secure society. I'm not saying that having a safe and secure society isn't good. However, even the best of men are still sinners and even the most peaceful countries still have to deal with criminals. A pagan country can have a low crime rate but it will still have to punish criminals. However, where the Gospel is preached, even the worst criminals can be reformed. Ever noticed a lot of people keep entering into jail over and over again but never learn their lesson? Ever noticed a lot of people keep getting into rehabilitation for drug addiction, they're freed but many of them tend to go back to old habits more often than not? Others may have given up on drugs or crime but still feel empty deep within? It's because the grace of God is far greater than the human will. The human will is just a failure. True reformation of the individual must begin from within and work itself outside.

God bless and have a fruitful holy week!

See also: